How modern blood-pressure targets are creating anxiety

Why 120/80 might be "guideline normal" but is far from "real world normal"

By Gary Chappell

WE ARE told 120/80 mmHg represents normal blood pressure with anything significantly above that labelled hypertension.

Yet many people in the UK, especially men over 40, report being told something very different in real life. In fact, frontdouble.com has been told that paramedics see 150/90 as "normal".

So which version is correct? And more importantly, are modern blood-pressure targets unintentionally creating anxiety in people who may never realistically sit at 120/80 again?

Where 120/80 came from

Blood pressure guidelines tightened significantly over the past decade. Large trials such as SPRINT suggested that targeting lower systolic blood pressure (about 120 mmHg) in higher-risk populations, reduced cardiovascular events compared with higher targets.

That influenced global guidance and shifted public messaging toward lower “optimal” numbers.

But consider this. SPRINT:

It was not a study of healthy, active middle-aged adults trying to stay within a textbook ideal. And this is where a now-global problem has manifested.

Systolic pressure naturally rises over time due to structural changes in blood vessels. For many adults over 45, particularly men, maintaining a consistent 120 systolic reading is not physiologically typical.

While this does not mean high blood pressure should be ignored, it does raise a question: Are we treating natural ageing as pathology?

Blood pressure: Risk versus reality

Guidelines are built for population-level risk reduction. This means they are largely generalised. They are designed to try to lower stroke rates, reduce heart attacks and improve long-term outcomes across millions of people.

They are not written for individualised athletic physiology, heavily muscled strength athletes and bodybuilders, or people with above-average body mass.

A 110kg resistance-trained male with elevated cardiac output and high muscle mass may not map neatly on to public health charts derived from sedentary populations. Yet the same 120/80 benchmark is applied universally.

And there is another uncomfortable layer to this; being told you are “hypertensive” when you feel well can trigger health anxiety, repeated checking, hypervigilance and stress. All of which can trigger high blood pressure. Especially in isolation.

The irony is difficult to ignore. For some individuals, constant focus on chasing 120/80 may increase sympathetic nervous system activation, potentially driving readings higher.

This does not mean high blood pressure is imaginary, but it does suggest that messaging matters.

GUIDELINES: But are they too simplified?

Why paramedics say 150/90 is “normal”

In acute care settings, clinicians assess danger, not long-term optimisation. A stable adult at 150/90 is not in crisis or regarded as a hypertensive emergency and so does not require urgent intervention. So reassurance is given that it is not acutely dangerous.

What this means is that official guidelines may be simplified for public messaging. There is a difference between:

For some people, especially older adults, aggressively pushing systolic blood pressure down can cause dizziness, falls, reduced cerebral perfusion and lower diastolic pressure. This means that lower is not automatically better for everyone.

Let's take bodybuilders, for example. They often present with higher bodyweight, increased left ventricular mass (physiological adaptation), higher haematocrit, elevated sympathetic tone, stimulant use and sleep disruption. Their cardiovascular profile differs from sedentary populations.

So while this does not make elevated blood pressure harmless, it means it complicates blanket statements. Bodybuilders not showing 120/80 blood pressure does not mean they are suddenly a walking heart attack or stroke. And those parading such numbers on social media does not mean they are a bastion of health, either. It does mean boasting about 120/80 simply to tick a box on the "official guidelines" is likely doing more harm than good to those watching.

So what should people do?

Instead of asking: “Is 150/90 normal?”, better questions may be:

Blood pressure is one dial on a much larger dashboard.

While 120/80 may be optimal in an "official" statistical sense, optimal is not always achievable for every adult at every age. And that does not automatically signify imminent danger.

There is a risk that simplified public messaging turns nuanced cardiovascular risk into a binary label – normal versus abnormal – creating unnecessary worry.

The goal should not be chasing a single number. The goal should be understanding risk and reducing it intelligently.

Frontdouble.com's Health and Education Hub

References

  1. NICE (UK) – Hypertension in adults: diagnosis and management (NG136)
    Official UK guidance defining clinic threshold of 140/90 mmHg.
    https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng136
  2. NHS – High blood pressure (hypertension)
    Public-facing UK explanation of blood pressure categories and risk.
    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/high-blood-pressure-hypertension/
  3. SPRINT Research Group (2015)
    A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.
    Found lower cardiovascular events with intensive systolic target (~120 mmHg) in higher-risk adults.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26551272/
  4. ACC/AHA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure (2017)
    Influential US guideline lowering hypertension definition to 130/80 mmHg.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29133356/
  5. Franklin SS et al. (1997)
    Hemodynamic patterns of age-related changes in blood pressure.
    Explains age-related arterial stiffness and rising systolic pressure.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9116922/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

High haemoglobin and haematocrit: real risk vs gym myth

How dangerous is it, what markers to look for and how your body can reset to higher levels

By Gary Chappell

FOR years the bodybuilding world has talked about “danger thresholds”, “ticking time bombs” and imminent stroke risk whenever someone returns a high haemoglobin and haematocrit result.

But what does the medical evidence actually say? And how should athletes interpret elevated numbers without falling into fear-based thinking?

This article breaks down what raised haemoglobin (Hb) and haematocrit (HCT) really mean, what doctors are genuinely concerned about, the role of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) and anabolic steroid use and, most importantly, what the actual risks are according to medical evidence.

multiple blood sample tubes for lab analysis

What are haemoglobin and haematocrit?

Hb) and HCT are two key values measured in a full blood count.

Normal ranges vary slightly by laboratory but, in adult males, haemoglobin is typically around 135–175g/L, while haematocrit usually sits between 40–50 per cent. Values above these ranges are considered elevated. When both haemoglobin (Hb) and haematocrit (HCT) are raised, this is often referred to as erythrocytosis or polycythaemia.

Why haemoglobin and haematocrit become elevated

1 Primary erythrocytosis (polycythaemia vera)

This is a rare blood cancer in which the bone marrow produces excessive red blood cells, most commonly due to JAK2 mutations. It is usually accompanied by raised platelets and white blood cells and requires specialist haematology care.

2 Secondary erythrocytosis

This is far more common, particularly in athletes, and includes causes such as:

With testosterone or androgen use, red blood cell production is stimulated via increased erythropoietin signalling and altered iron metabolism. Medically, this is classified as secondary erythrocytosis.

complete blood count showing haemoglobin and haematocrit values

What bodybuilders often get wrong

The typical gym narrative goes something like this: “High haematocrit means thick blood, which means a stroke is imminent.”

That is not how medicine works. Elevated Hb and HCT can increase blood viscosity, but blood viscosity alone does not guarantee clotting, stroke, heart attack or death. The relationship between red cell mass and thrombosis is complex and context-dependent.

In many forms of erythrocytosis, thrombosis risk is influenced by platelet and white-cell behaviour, not just red cell count Some inherited conditions show clot risk independent of haematocrit level. And in certain cases, repeated blood removal/letting (phlebotomy) has paradoxically increased clotting risk by disrupting blood dynamics

Put simply: haematocrit alone is not a reliable predictor of clotting events.

testosterone replacement therapy injection under medical supervision

So is testosterone responsible? Yes, particularly injectable testosterone. Testosterone is one of the most common causes of secondary erythrocytosis. Multiple studies show that men using injectable testosterone have a significantly higher likelihood of elevated haematocrit compared with other formulations.

One clinical comparison found that about 33 per cent of men on injectable testosterone exceeded a haematocrit of 50 per cent. Another analysis reported that men receiving testosterone therapy had a 315 per cent higher likelihood of developing erythrocytosis compared with untreated controls.

This is a well-documented physiological effect, not speculation.

red blood cells viewed under a medical microscope

Does high haematocrit increase stroke or heart attack risk?

This is where gym lore diverges most sharply from evidence. Large population studies do show an association between higher haematocrit and increased cardiovascular or venous thromboembolic risk. However, these studies demonstrate association, not direct causation and many cannot fully control for smoking, obesity, hypertension or metabolic disease. In addition, most are not specific to athletes, bodybuilders or TRT patients

Even major clinical reviews conclude that, in secondary erythrocytosis, the independent contribution of elevated haematocrit to clot risk remains inconclusive.

In other words: elevated haematocrit is a risk modifier, not an automatic catastrophe.

Clinicians are less concerned with one isolated result and far more focused on patterns and context.

Key considerations include:

trained athlete during recovery and physiological adaptation

So is high haematocrit dangerous for bodybuilders?

It can be, particularly when combined with other risk factors. But it is not a “ticking time bomb” by default.

Clinical guidance (including NHS-aligned practice) treats persistent erythrocytosis as something to monitor and stratify, not an emergency unless accompanied by additional abnormalities or symptoms.

Typical clinical steps include:

In secondary erythrocytosis, interventions such as dose adjustment or controlled phlebotomy are used to manage overall risk, not to chase arbitrary numbers.

Interestingly, the American practice guideline on testosterone therapy recommends against the use of testosterone in patients with hematocrit above 50 percent or untreated obstructive sleep apnea, whereas the European guideline on male hypogonadism suggests that testosterone therapy is contraindicated at a hematocrit greater than 54 per cent.

therapeutic phlebotomy used to manage elevated haemoglobin

Why some athletes “reset” to a higher haemoglobin level

A frequently misunderstood phenomenon is why haemoglobin and haematocrit may remain elevated even after blood donation/letting or dose reduction. This is real physiology.

Red blood cell production is regulated primarily by the kidneys’ oxygen-sensing mechanisms. When oxygen delivery has been chronically challenged, through sleep apnea, large body mass, sustained androgen exposure, or prolonged high demand, the system adapts.

Over time, the body may defend a higher red cell mass as its new baseline, sometimes referred to clinically as a reset erythropoietic drive.

Once established, haemoglobin may rebound after venesection and levels may not normalise quickly after dose reduction.

Blood donation or letting removes red cells, but it does not alter the kidney’s oxygen-sensing logic. If the body perceives higher oxygen-carrying capacity as necessary, it will simply replace what was removed.

athlete monitoring health and blood markers over time

This rebound effect is expected in secondary erythrocytosis and is not evidence of cancer or loss of control. Crucially, a higher baseline does not automatically equal danger, but it does reduce margin for error, as we will discuss next.

When baseline haemoglobin is already elevated, stacking additional erythropoietic stimuli, dehydration, stimulants or aggressive contest-prep tactics carries disproportionately higher risk.

That does not mean progression or competition is impossible, but it does mean escalation comes at a higher physiological cost. That is risk management, not fear.

So elevated haemoglobin and haematocrit are signals, not sentences. They warrant interpretation, monitoring and medical context, not panic fuelled by social media and gym folklore.

What bodybuilders often call a “catastrophe waiting to happen” is more accurately described as:

A marker that deserves careful evaluation, trend monitoring and informed decision-making. Clarity beats fear. Evidence beats myth.

References:

  1. McMullin MFF, et al. A guideline for the management of specific situations in polycythaemia vera and secondary erythrocytosis. Br J Haematol. 2019.
  2. Fox S, et al. Polycythemia Vera: Rapid Evidence Review. Am Fam Physician. 2021.
  3. Marchioli R, et al. Cardiovascular Events and Intensity of Treatment in Polycythemia Vera (CYTO-PV). N Engl J Med. 2013.
  4. Olivas-Martinez A, et al. Causes of erythrocytosis and its impact as a risk factor for thrombosis and mortality. Blood Res. 2021.
  5. Nguyen E, et al. Phenotypical differences and thrombosis rates in secondary erythrocytosis vs polycythaemia vera. Leukemia. 2021.
  6. Cervi A, et al. Testosterone use causing erythrocytosis. CMAJ. 2017.
  7. Bond P, et al. Testosterone therapy-induced erythrocytosis – can phlebotomy be justified? Endocr Connect. 2024.
  8. Kohn TP, et al. Rises in Haematocrit Are Associated With an Increased Risk of MACE in Men on Testosterone Therapy. J Urol. 2024.
  9. Neidhart A, et al. Prevalence and predictive factors of testosterone-induced erythrocytosis. Front Endocrinol. 2025.
  10. McMullin MFF, et al. Diagnosis and management of polycythaemia vera. Br J Haematol. 2019.
  11. Martelli V, et al. Prevalence of elevated haemoglobin and haematocrit in OSA. Sleep Breath. 2022.
  12. Medscape. Secondary Polycythemia – Overview. Updated 2024.

Frontdouble's HEALTH AND EDUCATION HUB

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *